Toast Presidency and The Board

[jathanas]

Thank you 76woodenspooners

One of BigFooty’s all-time-favourite posters, Reykjavik , was all across the board level stuff. He once posted a list of the responsibilities of a Not-For-Profit board like that of Collingwood …

abcdef.....ijklmnop

NFP board responsibilities
Specific responsibilities of a not-for-profit (NFP) board include:

• Driving the strategic direction of the organisation
• Working with the CEO to enable the organisation to obtain the resources, funds and personnel necessary to implement the organisation's strategic objectives
• Implementing, maintaining and (as necessary) refining a system of good governance that is appropriate for the organisation
• Reviewing reports and monitoring the performance of the organisation
• Regularly reviewing the board's structure and composition, so that these are appropriate for the organisation
• Appointing – and managing the performance of – a suitable CEO
• Succession planning for the CEO

While the above points are also applicable to for-profit boards, NFP boards also face a unique range of issues, such as:

• Difficulties in defining and measuring organisational effectiveness
• Transgression of role boundaries
• The negative impact of the structural compositions of some NFP boards, including those arising from representative models
• Funding dependencies and constraints

In practice, the role of the board is to supervise an organisation's business in two broad areas:

1. Overall business performance - ensuring the organisation develops and implements strategies and supporting policies to enable it to fulfill the objectives set out in the organisation's constitution. The board delegates the day to day management of the organisation but remains accountable to the shareholders for the organisation's performance. The board monitors and supports management in an on-going way.
2. Overall compliance performance - ensuring the organisation develops and implements systems to enable it to comply with its legal and policy obligations (complying with statutes such as the Corporations Act 2001, adhering to accounting standards) and ensure the organisation's assets are protected through appropriate risk management.

http://www.companydirectors.com.au/...ctor/NFP-governance/The-role-of-the-NFP-board

Link to original post …

Side by Side with Reykjavik - RIP (re-read Rey's message to us all #108, pg 5)

Reyk, I'm ridiculously happy to see you posting! :)

www.bigfooty.com

 

[jmac70]

Apathy in action.

More like alcohol induced memory loss.

 

[Markfs]

More like alcohol induced memory loss.

maybe we should have weekly board elections to cater to members like yourself...

 

[NMBB]

More like alcohol induced memory loss.

I wanted to suggest that but discretion took over at the last minute

 

[jmac70]

I wanted to suggest that but discretion took over at the last minute

I can remember voting for the cop. Maybe he can sort De Goey out.

 

[Markfs]

I can remember voting for the cop. Maybe he can sort De Goey out.

i always try to identify the person without charisma.... they must be doing something right

 

[Herzog]

Everytime I saw financial sector come up in someone's bio I cringed. I tried to avoid voting for anyone with "financial sector" in their bio but it wasn't possible.

 

[Chameleon75]

Everytime I saw financial sector come up in someone's bio I cringed. I tried to avoid voting for anyone with "financial sector" in their bio but it wasn't possible.

diversity

 

[MyManLynch]

I intend to vote next week.
I was hoping that Browne (or his camp rep) would come on the BF Board & engage with some Members.
My suspicions (of his style) are confirmed.
Do not expect improved Member feedback to be driven by him.
Leaning towards voting for 4 ‘independents’.

 

[barrackers]

I intend to vote next week.
I was hoping that Browne (or his camp rep) would come on the BF Board & engage with some Members.
My suspicions (of his style) are confirmed.
Do not expect improved Member feedback to be driven by him.
Leaning towards voting for 4 ‘independents’.

Will be interesting to see how it works out. Having more than 4 independents may help Browne in that it will split the anti-Browne vote. Fewer independents may have seen a Daniher, Howe, Grundy mark of the year situation where the non-vote piled on the remaining option.

 

[60 Yards Out]

Everytime I saw financial sector come up in someone's bio I cringed. I tried to avoid voting for anyone with "financial sector" in their bio but it wasn't possible.

‘Financial sector’ is ok. What you really need to avoid is ‘HR Department’.

 

[Pie eyed]

Pie eyed have you heard back from Browne about a thread?

No.
Crickets from the Browne Team since I asked they join a thread.

Also no response from any others I contacted.
I would not blame them though some of the contact details I had were very speculative.
I am happy that two actually did respond and that they had a seemingly worthwhile exchange with posters who were interested.

We should organise Bigfooty Magpies version of Q&A.

Get a couple of posters each week from each side of an issue and invite a handful of Pies people, from society, the club, a player official or even the media to sit in and chat.

 

[Quicky]

No.
Crickets from the Browne Team since I asked they join a thread.

Also no response from any others I contacted.
I would not blame them though some of the contact details I had were very speculative.
I am happy that two actually did respond and that they had a seemingly worthwhile exchange with posters who were interested.

We should organise Bigfooty Magpies version of Q&A.

Get a couple of posters each week from each side of an issue and invite a handful of Pies people, from society, the club, a player official or even the media to sit in and chat.

I think its awesome what you organised. It's also awesome that C Macdonald and SeanC had the good grace to front up and chat to us all. It's a shame about Browne.

 

[PonsfordMagpie]

Colin Moorhead did an interview with Swoop Luke. Worth a watch for those still undecided or interested in the electoral process.

 

[PonsfordMagpie]

Jeff Browne Team has a YouTube channel, which uploaded a few short videos from their Q&A at the Grace Darling Hotel.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UClrPgnmtkriR0ixaUGXpdQw/videos

Some more videos from the Q&A can also be found from the channel below.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCaKHMrLxc_HSqAPrHzsm6cA/videos

 

[76woodenspooners]

Colin Moorhead did an interview with Swoop Luke. Worth a watch for those still undecided or interested in the electoral process.

For me, this vid on Colin Moorhead …

Pros from the interview

- Projects as a very strong candidate. Solid board experience. Solid decision making. If this bloke was on the board of the club, you’d have strong confidence that Collingwood would still be in business at the end of his term (some other candidates give me a lot less confidence of this)

- Focused on culture. (“Culture eats strategy for breakfast” … and whilst I reckon strategy is important, I love the sentiment)

- “Let the footy department do their job” … loved this.

- Loved the national / international perspective he brings about Collingwood being a brand that goes beyond Melbourne and Victoria.


Cons from the interview

- Pity about the annoying buffering.

- Pity we’re only learning more about him after a week into voting. It’s 2021, if he’s genuinely serious about this, he should have been more proactive in putting himself out there.

- Shame he wasn’t asked if he would make himself available to be President if asked. Given that he has been President on similar boards, would have thought he’d project as quite a viable alternative to Jeff Browne.

- Projects as somebody who has been through the process of modernising boards, and understanding what is involved which is a ‘pro’, however, suspect he’s speaking to all the stuff that our board has already gone through (diversity, etc)

 

[76woodenspooners]

Jeff Browne Team has a YouTube channel, which uploaded a few short videos from their Q&A at the Grace Darling Hotel.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UClrPgnmtkriR0ixaUGXpdQw/videos

Some more videos from the Q&A can also be found from the channel below.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCaKHMrLxc_HSqAPrHzsm6cA/videos

For these vids on Browne et al …

Pros from the videos

- Liked that there’s a ‘healing’ with the remaining board members. (Would prefer to hear this also from the remaining board members)

- Liked his talk of support for ex-players, sounds like a great initiative. (Not sure if / how it is different to what the club does today?)

- Liked that he is proposing a consultation period with the members. (Not sure how well that’ll work in practice, the club have spent much of the last six months consulting with, and listening to the members … will we go through all that again?)

- I’m open to his comment about providing ‘Leadership’. Have to assume here he’s talking specifically about external leadership of the members and fans, and projecting as a public leader in the way Ed was.

Cons from the videos

- Most of the stuff in the videos is about their Collingwood credentials, and how much they know their Collingwood history. If we were voting about who should be in the cheer squad or running the historical society, then it’d be very hard to go past Jeff et al, but this is the board of the club, and other skills are required. Didn’t really get much sense from these vids about how well they’ll govern the club.

- Jeff got far too close to meddling into Footy Department stuff for my liking (as he has along the journey, these vids only reinforced it). The board is there to provide governance, oversight of the process, not to have opinions about the colour scheme of the locker room. (for example)

- I found his mention of restoring board confidentially curious. Sure, boards can’t function effectively without trust. Board members need to be able to trust that their passionate debates and discussions stay within the four walls of the board room. But he mentioned “confidentiality” as an issue, but not “transparency”. Hmmm, sounds a bit retrograde.

 

[Obese Arachnid]

For these vids on Browne et al …

Pros from the videos

- Liked that there’s a ‘healing’ with the remaining board members. (Would prefer to hear this also from the remaining board members)

- Likes his talk of support for ex-players, sounds like a great initiative. (Not sure if / how it is different to what the club does today?)

- Liked that he is proposing a consultation period with the members. (Not sure how well that’ll work in practice, the club have spent much of the last six months consulting with, and listening to the members … will we go through all that again?)

- I’m open to his comment about providing ‘Leadership’. Have to assume here he’s talking specifically about external leadership of the members and fans, and projecting as a public leader in the way Ed was.

Cons from the videos

- Most of the video durations are about their Collingwood credentials, how much they know their Collingwood history. If we were voting about who should be in the cheer squad or running the historical society, then it’d be very hard to go past Jeff et al, but this is the board of the club, and other skills required. Didn’t really get much sense about how well they’ll govern the club from these vids

- Jeff got far too close to meddling into Footy Department stuff for my liking (as he has along the journey, these vids only reinforced it). The board is there to provide governance, oversight of the process, not to have opinions about the colour scheme of the locker room. (for example)

- I found his mention of restoring board confidentially curious. Sure, boards can’t function effectively without trust. Board members need to be able to trust that their passionate debates and discussions stay within the four walls of the board room. But he mentioned “confidentiality” as an issue, but not “transparency”. Hmmm, sounds a but retrograde.

Once again all I get from Browne is this...

 

[PonsfordMagpie]

In black and white: The backstories of Collingwood's board hopefuls

Ahead of the Magpies’ first board election this millennium, we spoke with a spate of candidates vying for the chance to hold court at the Holden Centre.

www.zerohanger.com

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Not sure why people think Board candidates should come on to Bigfooty to explain themselves.

There’s a process in place. If you’re eligible to vote there’s plenty of information available to be able to decide how to vote.

 

[Quicky]

Not sure why people think Board candidates should come on to Bigfooty to explain themselves.

There’s a process in place. If you’re eligible to vote there’s plenty of information available to be able to decide how to vote.

I don't think it's so much that they think they should. More that they appreciate that they have.

 

[PonsfordMagpie]

Just voted now.

Good to have a say after so many years.

 

[PonsfordMagpie]

I should say it's disappointing we could only select 4 candidates in the end.

Makes me wonder whether the number of board members should expand to 8-10 compared to the current 7 we have now.

There were plenty of outstanding candidates, and they shouldn't be deterred from running again in the future if they miss out this time round. The club is healthier for having gone through this process.

Best of luck to SeanC, C Macdonald and all other candidates running.

 

[MackLuck1719]

For these vids on Browne et al …

Pros from the videos

- Liked that there’s a ‘healing’ with the remaining board members. (Would prefer to hear this also from the remaining board members)

- Liked his talk of support for ex-players, sounds like a great initiative. (Not sure if / how it is different to what the club does today?)

- Liked that he is proposing a consultation period with the members. (Not sure how well that’ll work in practice, the club have spent much of the last six months consulting with, and listening to the members … will we go through all that again?)

- I’m open to his comment about providing ‘Leadership’. Have to assume here he’s talking specifically about external leadership of the members and fans, and projecting as a public leader in the way Ed was.

Cons from the videos

- Most of the stuff in the videos is about their Collingwood credentials, and how much they know their Collingwood history. If we were voting about who should be in the cheer squad or running the historical society, then it’d be very hard to go past Jeff et al, but this is the board of the club, and other skills are required. Didn’t really get much sense from these vids about how well they’ll govern the club.

- Jeff got far too close to meddling into Footy Department stuff for my liking (as he has along the journey, these vids only reinforced it). The board is there to provide governance, oversight of the process, not to have opinions about the colour scheme of the locker room. (for example)

- I found his mention of restoring board confidentially curious. Sure, boards can’t function effectively without trust. Board members need to be able to trust that their passionate debates and discussions stay within the four walls of the board room. But he mentioned “confidentiality” as an issue, but not “transparency”. Hmmm, sounds a bit retrograde.

That’s laughable that Browne would site confidentiality as an issue - everyone knows that every leak from the past decade has been via Eddie McGuire through to Tom Browne - notice how nothing has leaked from the Club since Eddie left?!

 

[swoop42]

As a non voting member what does the ballot form actually look like? Has anyone uploaded a picture of it in this thread?

When it comes to casting a vote and collating the winners what method do we use?

Do members simply mark all/some of the boxes in order of preference starting with number 1 or do you just mark with an x alongside the 4 names you want to fill that number of vacant board positions?

 

[barrackers]

As a non voting member what does the ballot form actually look like? Has anyone uploaded a picture of it in this thread?

When it comes to casting a vote and collating the winners what method do we use?

Do members simply mark all/some of the boxes in order of preference starting with number 1 or do you just mark with an x alongside the 4 names you want to fill that number of vacant board positions?

Already voted, so can’t post a pic however it’s simply selecting 4 candidates and most votes wins. No order or preferences.